9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 533X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g of the ld.CIT(A). Therefore, his order rejecting the valuation of shares at Rs.1137.27 per share is found to be in order, and upheld. With regard to the rejection of valuation of shares at Rs.122.64 per share, the ld.CIT(A) found that though the valuation was done on the basis of book value, the land was valued after indexation ,which he noted was not as per the prescribed method. There is nothing before us to controvert this finding of the ld.CIT(A). Therefore, even rejection of the valuation done by the assessee at Rs.122.64 per share calls for no interference. No merit in the grounds raised by the assessee against order of the ld.CIT(A) upholding the addition made under section 56(2)(viib) - Decided against assessee. - ITA No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The Valuation of Shares done as per Provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) of Income Tax Act 1961. 2. Subsequently in CIT Appeal the honourable Commissioner Appeal reduced the addition to the extent of Rs.12,98,550/-. Accordingly, Appeal effect is give by the AO and revised demand issued by the learned AO. GROUNDS OF APPEAL 1. The learned assessing officer has erred in law. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the AO has erred in assessing the income of the appellant at Rs.83,47,940/-, instead of Rs.22,037/- returned. As such aggregate estimated additions of Rs.83,25,900/- may please be deleted. 3. The learned assessing officer erred in making an addition on account of Share va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned year of face value of Rs.10/- each at a premium of Rs.100.90 per share. When asked to justify the premium at which shares were issued, the assessee submitted that as per provisions of section 56(2)(viib) of the Act the shares were valued as per Rule 11UA at Rs.122/- per share which valuation was made on the basis of book value ,with the indexed value of land shown in the balance sheet. The assessee submitted another valuation on the basis of valuation done by the Chartered Accountant as per Rule 11UA of the Rules following discounted cash flow method at the rate of Rs.1137.27 per share. Yet another valuation was submitted by the assessee as per book value at Rs.95.18 per share. The AO ignored all the valuations and added the enti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o interfere in the same. The ld.CIT(A) has given valid reason for rejecting both the valuations of the shares at Rs.1137.27 per share and at Rs.122.64 per share, pointing out that valuation at Rs.1137.22 per share, done on the basis of discounted cash flow method ,was based on projected profits of the assessee for the subsequent year which projections did not have any solid basis. There is nothing before us to counter this finding of the ld.CIT(A). Therefore, his order rejecting the valuation of shares at Rs.1137.27 per share is found to be in order, and upheld. 8. With regard to the rejection of valuation of shares at Rs.122.64 per share, the ld.CIT(A) found that though the valuation was done on the basis of book value, the land was val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
